§Why CasetextPricing

Ave Maria University v. Sebelius et al

MOTION to Reopen Case , MOTION for preliminary injunction one hour oral argument requested

28 Cited authorities

  1. City of Boerne v. Flores

    521 U.S. 507 (1997)   Cited 1,803 times   21 Legal Analyses
    Holding that RFRA is unconstitutional in so far as it permits suits against state actors

  2. Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye, Inc. v. City of Hialeah

    508 U.S. 520 (1993)   Cited 1,552 times   14 Legal Analyses
    Holding that statements by city council, including asking: "[w]hat can we do to prevent the Church from opening?" to show animus

  3. Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficente Uniao do Vegetal

    546 U.S. 418 (2006)   Cited 785 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the "burdens at the preliminary injunction stage track the burdens at trial"

  4. McCullen v. Coakley

    573 U.S. 464 (2014)   Cited 529 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a statute was not a content-based restriction because "[w]hether petitioners violate[d] the [a]ct 'depend[ed]' not 'on what they say,' . . . but simply on where they say it" (quoting Holder v. Humanitarian L. Project, 561 U.S. 1, 27, 130 S.Ct. 2705, 177 L.Ed.2d 355 (2010))

  5. United States v. Playboy Entertainment Group, Inc.

    529 U.S. 803 (2000)   Cited 835 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a statute was content based because it “applies only to channels primarily dedicated to sexually explicit adult programming or other programming that is indecent”

  6. Larson v. Valente

    456 U.S. 228 (1982)   Cited 666 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that setting aside an allegedly unlawful statutory provision that compels plaintiffs to register and report redresses the plaintiffs’ alleged injury of registering and reporting because, even though the plaintiffs could be compelled to register and report through another statutory provision, they will no longer be compelled to do so under the statutory provision at issue

  7. Siegel v. Lepore

    234 F.3d 1163 (11th Cir. 2000)   Cited 1,223 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that there was no irreparable injury where the harm was "wholly speculative"

  8. Schiavo ex Rel. Schindler v. Schiavo

    403 F.3d 1223 (11th Cir. 2005)   Cited 697 times
    Denying an All Writs Act injunction

  9. Korte v. Sebelius

    735 F.3d 654 (7th Cir. 2013)   Cited 449 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding plaintiff companies were entitled to preliminary injunctive relief

  10. O Centro Espirita Beneficiente v. Ashcroft

    389 F.3d 973 (10th Cir. 2004)   Cited 444 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding the modified test does not apply if the requested preliminary injunction is one of three disfavored types

  11. Section 1132 - Civil enforcement

    29 U.S.C. § 1132   Cited 26,360 times   171 Legal Analyses
    Holding liable "[a]ny administrator" who fails to provide documents in a timely manner

  12. Section 2000bb-1 - Free exercise of religion protected

    42 U.S.C. § 2000bb-1   Cited 1,124 times   27 Legal Analyses
    Providing for "appropriate relief" in judicial suit

  13. Section 300gg-13 - Coverage of preventive health services

    42 U.S.C. § 300gg-13   Cited 171 times   10 Legal Analyses
    Requiring "evidence-informed preventive care and screenings"

  14. Section 4980H - Shared responsibility for employers regarding health coverage

    26 U.S.C. § 4980H   Cited 116 times   46 Legal Analyses
    Establishing an employer mandate

  15. Section 36B - Refundable credit for coverage under a qualified health plan

    26 U.S.C. § 36B   Cited 80 times   35 Legal Analyses
    Providing premium tax credits to make health insurance plans, including employer-sponsored plans, more affordable

  16. Section 4980D - Failure to meet certain group health plan requirements

    26 U.S.C. § 4980D   Cited 73 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Excluding church plans from certain minimum excise taxes imposed on health plans

  17. Section 18011 - Preservation of right to maintain existing coverage

    42 U.S.C. § 18011   Cited 48 times
    Exempting pre-ACA "grandfathered plans"

  18. Section 18071 - Reduced cost-sharing for individuals enrolling in qualified health plans

    42 U.S.C. § 18071   Cited 16 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Cost-sharing reduction

  19. Section 147.131 - Accommodations in connection with coverage of certain preventive health services

    45 C.F.R. § 147.131   Cited 73 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Prohibiting third parties from directly or indirectly charging objecting organizations for the cost of contraceptive coverage and obligating the third parties to pay for the contraceptive care

  20. Section 59.5 - What requirements must be met by a family planning project?

    42 C.F.R. § 59.5   Cited 40 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Implementing regulations for Title X provide that family planning services must be provided without regard to age

  21. Section 1.6033-2 - Returns by exempt organizations and returns by certain nonexempt organizations

    26 C.F.R. § 1.6033-2   Cited 14 times
    In 26 C.F.R. § 1.6033–2(h), the Treasury Regulations provide a three (3) prong test to determine whether a group is an “integrated auxiliary” under section 6033(a)(3)(A)(i) of the Internal Revenue Code.